issued by the Board of Parole and reimprisoned pending a hearing to determine if my conditional release should be revoked.'
Mr. Cassidy testified at the hearing on the petition that he recommended revocation of petitioner's conditional release for violation of these two conditions, when petitioner continued to communicate with inmates after having been warned not to do so.
At the hearing before this court petitioner admitted that he sent two letters to Wilbert William Albert Green, a prisoner at Atlanta Penitentiary, a handwritten letter postmarked July 20, 1955, and a typed letter dated July 22, 1955, both signed 'James H. Hicks', the name of Green's uncle, who was on Green's approved correspondence list. He admitted that he was warned by Mr. Cassidy not to endeavor to communicate further with inmates at Atlanta. He admitted that thereafter he caused to be mailed from New York City three postcards, postmarked October 30, 1955, and addressed to Green, William H. Ward, and Curtis W. Sibby, all prisoners at Atlanta. Petitioner testified that two of the cards at his direction were signed 'Elane.'
Although the handwriting varies somewhat on the handwritten letter and the three cards, all of it corresponds with some part of the erratic handwriting of petitioner in his petition herein; and it was recognized by the authorities at Atlanta as Moore's writing.
'Associate' is defined as 'to join or unite as a friend, companion, partner or confederate * * * to unite in company; to keep company * * * to unite in action; to join for a common purpose.'
Although commonly it would not be used to include written communications with another, this court holds that, as used in Condition 12, 'associate' can reasonably be construed to include such communications. The purpose of Condition 12 is to eliminate the prisoner's contacts with persons having a criminal record during the period of his conditional release. The parole officer necessarily must have discretion in supervising such contacts, social and otherwise, written as well as in person.
The communications in this case, particularly the postcards,
show literally an attempt to 'join or unite as a friend, companion, partner, or confederate,' or 'to unite in action; to join for a common purpose.' The parole officer had reason to suspect that they were intended to convey some meaning other than that which appeared on the surface.
Petitioner, who had recently been confined at Atlanta, knew that prisoners are permitted to receive mail only from persons on an approved correspondence list, whose criminal record has been investigated. There is no doubt that his use of the aliases, 'James H. Hicks' and 'Elane', and the mailing of the postcards from New York were attempts to conceal the identity of the correspondent and to circumvent the mail regulations at Atlanta. There is reason to believe the purported adoption of Green, by means of a handwritten one-page, notarized statement signed by petitioner, was an attempt to place himself within the class of near relatives permitted to correspond with the inmate. His statements to the parole officer suggesting that Green was his illegitimate son were without foundation, as Green is the legitimate son of William Green and Marie Hicks, as shown by his birth certificate and testified of Green's aunt, Dorothy Hicks.
Petitioner by his actions prior to revocation, his contemptuous attitude, and his disregard of his parole officer's supervision and the mail regulations of Atlanta Penitentiary, amply demonstrated that he was not willing to cooperate with the parole officer or to fulfill his obligations as a law-abiding citizen. Hence, the Parole Board did not act arbitrarily, but upon reasonable cause in revoking petitioner's conditional release.
Petitioner stresses the fact that his attempts at communication with the Atlanta prisoners were thwarted by the prison authorities, and argues that as the result of their action there was no 'association' by him with the inmates. This contention is without merit. No action by the authorities in Atlanta could in any wise affect the character of petitioner's completed acts. So far as he was concerned, his attempts at communication were accomplished violations of his conditional release.
For the foregoing reasons I will dismiss the petition and discharge the rule to show cause.